Consolidating

In case you were wondering about the all of the new posts. I wanted to put all of my articles in one place. So here are all of the posts from the last couple of years.  I hope you enjoy reading them as much as I have enjoyed rereading them. 

Much Love :)

Engineer's Perspective: Song Harmony 2/13/09

 Working with faculty is a blessing and a curse.  We in concert production often have a lot of complaints about the disregard of our department's procedures.  No set up information, late paper work, starting late, ending late.  Usually the worst offenders are faculty members.  At the heart of it I think we feel that they take us, and the performance spaces for granted which students never do.  But, Berklee faculty is faculty for a reason... they're really good at what they do.  I think perhaps for this show I underestimated the size and difficulty of it, I wrongly assumed it would be a night of jazz, simple ensembles that wouldn't need much from me.  What I got instead was a large and varied mixture of big bands and small duos, acoustic folk bands to musical theatre.  I was not prepared mentally and am grateful that everyone seemed understanding of my uncharacteristically flustered demeanor.     After what seemed like a endless sound check of striking mics, adding mics, adjusting stage set ups, trying to make everyone comfortable and happy, and oh yeah trying to make it sound good, I actually had time during the show to relax and listen to the music.  Usually these hectic shows keep me agitated throughout the performance.  This time I could listen and enjoy.  I was pleasantly surprised by the variety, cleverness, and fun in the music.  Typically Berklee faculty take themselves far to seriously. 

            This year's concert was a collaboration between the voice department and the harmony department.  So I had a little something to latch my attention onto.  (Sometimes when listening to instrumental music it's hard for me to focus.)  The concert started with an interesting re arrangement of "Over the Rainbow" and then Progressed to the strange but ultimately funny "visiting my aunties" by Darrell Katz, and the cute and witty songs by Lucy... "Don't Let the Fun Begin" and "Go Away".  Which would have been very funny had they been better performed, as it was they were merely sad.  I feel Lucy is a better composer than she is a performer. Her witty lyrics were lost and the subtle irony of the clichéd stylings of the song was over shadowed by a performance that lacked conviction.  The highlights of the evening were "Red Blues" performed by Donna Mc Elroy and George Russell.  Also composed by Darrell Katz this was a beautiful ballad that was just strange enough to make it interesting and was performed beautifully by Donna. I'm a big Donna fan though and it appeared most of the crowd was also.  The other highlight for me was "Screw Cap Vino", because how can you not like a song where the hook is "Guess I'll play a round of Keno and drink my screw cap vino".  We also got a taste of Michael Wartofsky's new musical "The River is Me", which I look forward to hearing concert in March. 

            Each piece was performed with a fun carefree-ness that I can only assume comes from years of doing what you love.  That is the blessing of working with faculty.  Yes they can be intimidating at times, you know "I've been doing this for twenty years, I know what I'm talking about" I get a lot of that, and I can respect that but it sometimes makes the job a little stressful.  But watching and hearing them play is a pleasure.  I wonder if they get the same feeling of disbelief that I do, the disbelief that they actually do this for a living and are constantly in an environment of talent and creativity.  Or is the awe greater for those of us on the side, who only get to bear witness.                

Engineer's Perspective: Heavy Rotation 2/13/09

I have a confession to make. I love the Heavy Rotation concert at the BPC.  I'm not supposed to, it's supposed to be a big pain in my side, but I can't help really enjoying myself on that night.  I'm sure everyone who played that night might find it hard to believe since I probably looked ready to hit someone.  Situations such as that, where there were nine different bands (that's a lot for a ninety minute show) require the stage guy to be a bit of a hard ass.  It's part of the job, admittedly one that is difficult for me to execute, but I do it. I stand around frowning with a "no" ready at my lips for any one who dare inconvenience me with a request.  I hurry bands through their sound checks cutting them off when their 15 minutes are up.  I'm snappy, rude, a bit condescending, at least that's how it feels, definitely out of character for me.  But I want all the bands and participants to know that despite all of my griping I thought it was a great event.  It wasn't perfect, it went long, some of the bands were difficult, it was disorganized, the high hat clutch broke, bottom line, it was a stressful two nights.  Despite its faults it's probably the most fun night of music at the BPC.  Most of the shows I see are small reserved events.  Small, respectful crowds out to her some good music.  The quality of the performance is often very good and the quality of the music even better, but it's usually so very serious.  I feel sometimes that people spend so much of their time thinking about music, analyzing music that they forget the joy of music.  That can't be said for last night's performers.  Even the sound check was fun to watch.  My favorite moment was when the guitarist from Sex! overestimated the length of his instrument cable and in his excitement pulled it right out the amp on the first chord, then proceeded to do it again (we rectified the problem for the day of the show).  And really every band had that same excitement, they seemed giddy with it. Like kids playing rock star in front of the mirror.  I don't get to see that much in the BPC, usually everything is orderly and routine.  That's right, I'll admit it, I like that the concert is a bit unorganized, it's a frenzy, which makes it all the more exciting. 

            This year all of the bands were good.  I haven't been able to say that about every year, but I can't honestly say that I disliked any of the groups that performed.  My personal favorites were Nini and Ben who I heard last year at the New Music festival, White Shoe Brown Shoe, 'cause their second song was just so catchy, and Sex! who were too much fun to watch not to love them.  Even watching the crowd dance with the DJ in between the acts was fun.  I could never really tell if they were really into the music or just mocking him, but regardless every one there was having a great time.  Some people even jumped up on stage during a particularly long change over.  I didn't have the heart to kick them off the stage right away and really anything to distract the audience while we hustled to find a working high hat clutch was welcomed.  Really the only low part for me was when Shea Rose added a song and two singers to her ten-minute spot.  Obviously she went way over her allotted time, and on top of that her performance was weak compared to the rehearsal night. I thought it looked sloppy, and her actions unprofessional, which tainted my opinion of what was shaping out to be a wonderful event. 

            Regardless of what went wrong, this concert made me feel like for one night the Boston music scene comes to me, since I rarely have the chance to go out and experience it for myself.  I get to taste it all, rock, pop, hip-hop, blues, the sweet and simple, the outrageous, it all gets bundled together into one night of music.  It's a night of variety and lots of talent and that's really all I want out of concert after listening to and watching the same shows seemingly over and over again.  Something about the Heavy Rotation concert always stays with me.  Even years later I could sing for you word for word songs I'd heard played at the heavy rotations event, and I sure this year will be no exception (Down the Road has been stuck in my head for a week).  Working this event makes me feel a part of something new, outside of the little Berklee bubble.  Reminding me of why I enjoy doing what 

Engineer's Perspective 1/29/09

It's been a while since I've written, which I regret.  Another semester is under way and nothing demonstrates that more than the singer's showcase auditions.  Berklee's own little American Idol.  These auditions are the highlight of the semester for me.  It's very little work for me as an engineer so I just get to sit back and make my own picks for showcase.  It is amazingly similar to watching American Idol at home and I get to play Simon, which let's face it is what everyone does when they watch.    I debate with my co-workers about the singer's song choice, or arrangement, vocal ability and (most important to me) stage presence.  Every semester I watch and pick and know that the judges will pick differently.  I know by now what they look for but I always hold out hope that one of my underdogs will sneak in.  Admittedly I have a bias.  I have been involved with just about every Singer's Showcase since 2002.  Seven years may not seem like a long time especially compared to others who have been involved since the beginning but I've seen enough to be tired of it. Tired of the same singer's and the same songs trying to find some way to make this semester more exciting and spectacular, when really all I want is to make the show different.  I sit and watch big voice after big voice come to knock the socks off of the judges, there's very little subtlety.  There's no one that whispers sweetly commanding you to sit on the edge of your seat and really pay attention to what they are doing, or one who takes a song you've heard a thousand times and makes it fresh and new. Rarely is there even great presence on the stage. There's confidence and comfort, but it's rare to see someone who you can't help but watch perform.  Stage presence and musicality, more so than singing ability makes great singers.  Some people would argue, that singing ability at an institution like Berklee which teaches singing technique, is more important than performance ability and that they should at least be weighted equally. But a great performer can be forgiven any fault in his ability where as a great voice alone is not enough to compensate for lack of charisma. You'll say that he was good but boring or maybe you won't be able to put a finger on what you didn't like, but you know it wasn't what it could have been. A performer needs to connect with the audience and not just impress them.  And here is where the Showcase fails, it's filled with extremely talented people but always disappoints, because instead of nurturing individuality and creativity it produces the same ol' thing semester after semester.  And the result is the same ol' people turn out every year to audition and eventually all of those other great performers here at Berklee don't bother auditioning.  With a little flexibility and an open mind Singer's Showcase could live up it's potential could maybe be worthy of all of the hype.    

Engineer's Perspective: 50 years of Bossa Nova 8/23/08

 As I have mentioned before it is often difficult when working a concert to separate the experience of the engineer, stagehand, etc. from the experience of the audience. Some one says to you after the fact how great the show was and all you can remember is how irritated, frustrated, and exhausted you were. That concert as far as you are concerned was awful. Luckily for last night's show I wasn't mixing it. I had the opportunity to work and exhaust myself on stage while someone else dealt with the frustration.  It made being objective a little easier.  And with my objectivity I will sum up the concert in one word... considering.  It sounded good, considering there wasn't a sound check.  The orchestra did well considering they were unrehearsed.  The engineer remained remarkably civil considering the impossibility of the situation he was presented with. This concert, which had the potential to be great, was merely mediocre, and it's unfortunate.  My impression after it was over was that the orchestra was unnecessary.  Every song that was just the band or a small ensemble was magical. The band grooved and the simple arrangements were lyrical and beautiful.  My personal favorite was "Morrer de Amor" arranged for piano, voice, and cello, which was equally sweet and sorrowful. The concert's special guest, famed guitarist Oscar Castro-Neves, was (as is the case with most of the seasoned professionals that the school brings in) wonderful to watch.  His anecdotes were funny, endearing and educational. He wore the teacher's cap admirably for his audience, telling them about the history of the music, the people who created it, and reminding them to always play for the joy of it.  I especially liked the story of calling up Jobim and asking him to jam. It embodies the idea of playing for joy; it's unassuming and naive in the best possible way.  So why, with all of this joy, knowledge, and beautiful music going around was there still this bad aftertaste in my mouth? For all of its good elements it couldn't escape the taint of unprepared ness.  Every time I looked at the ugly scrim hanging in the back I cringed, but we didn't have time or space to change it.  Or whenever someone tried to awkwardly maneuver the stage I was reminded of the three hours I'd just spent attempting to fit the orchestra onto our too small stage.    And I was mad that this wonderful artist was subjected to the worst Berklee style overproduction.  It seems like every other show we do has turned into Songbook.  Or is trying to be without realizing how difficult it is to pull off that show. A golden rule to go by is less is more, and when you do have more, it's important to allot more time for it.  Songbook doesn't happen in a day and the BPC is not Symphony hall; expecting either is asking for a sub par performance. Fortunately for them I enjoyed the part of the concert I watched... considering.

Engineer's Perspective: My Multi-Band Nightmare 4/1/09

 Sometimes it seems my year doesn't really start until the spring semester.  That's when things get a bit hectic around here.  But this year seems to be more tiring than others. It's not that there are more concerts, but they seem to be cramming more into each event.  I 'm speaking of multi-band concerts: where they attempt, (no actually they succeed) to fit between five and fifteen bands into one ninety-minute show.  Now maybe to the audience this doesn't seem like a big deal.  Most concerts have multiple bands, battle of the band concerts happen all the time, why is it so difficult for Berklee to do them?

            The issue is time constraint. I'm sure all the people who work sound or who are stage hands for these type of concerts despise them as much as I do, either that or they don't care.  Since I'm an engineer who cares, who has an invested interest in the success of any show I work, these concerts are frustrating, tiring, and always disappointing.   For those who don't know, a BPC show is a seven-hour shift.  A two-hour set-up, a 90 minute sound-check, the house is open for forty-five minutes, 90 minute show (supposedly), and an hour to tear down.  This is plenty of time for most events, but when the sound check involves ten bands, that gives us only nine minutes per band to change over and check. What that means is that I hear each band for five minutes, if I’m lucky.  This is not enough time to get the monitors straight, let alone get a mix going. And that's just ten bands.  Do the math and figure out what would happen if there were more. Though it may be hard to believe, a properly balanced mix isn't instantaneous, there is more going on behind the console than just bringing up faders, and it takes time.  Some of you perhaps will still say, 'That's not so bad, five minutes is enough time and you can always mix on the fly'. Which is true, and if the bands are similar in style and instrumentation it's not a problem, in fact it makes for a more exciting evening. But this is rarely the case and even so, it means that no one should expect perfection, which people often do.

            This leads me to the second part of my nightmare scenario: pressure.  Most of these multi-band concerts are what we call high profile events.  The night when the house is packed, and the boss's boss is there; where I am under the microscope, and inevitably something goes wrong. As you can imagine, my feeling as the show grows closer is one of either frustrated resignation, or just plain ol’ anxiety.  It's awful facing a show with such low expectations.  Even if everything goes well, at the end you feel as if a bus hit you.  There's no satisfaction from having done a good job, there's just this elation at having made it through the concert partially intact.

            I know I've been ranting a bit in this article; I understand that dealing with these situations is my job.  And ultimately at the end of the day, as bad as I may feel about it, the show always goes on without too much blood loss.  But it could be better.  When dealing with such a large production, preparedness is essential, and more time is necessary.  And I don't mean sound checking for five hours instead of two. Tired ears only worsen my ability to mix. If you have a show with multiple bands ask for a tech rehearsal the day before.  This leaves plenty of time for each band to check, to work on transitions, get everyone happy and then come back the next day fresh.  As a leader for these concerts, look ahead, decide how much time each group should have to sound check. Take into consideration how much time it will take to change from one band to the next.  Try to get the bands to share equipment, but don't assume that they all will.  Take changeovers into account when deciding on the show order.  The more information the engineer has before he starts, the easier the sound check goes. Last, and most importantly, bring a lot of patience: we understand that leading these shows can be stressful so we are patient with you. That courtesy should be reciprocated.  It would certainly be appreciated.  

 

Engineer's Perspective: Mandolin Madness 2/19/2008

Last week I had the pleasure and privilege to mix for John McGann's Mandolin Madness.  And all I can say was it was a perfect evening. I am so happy that this was the first concert that I mixed on the new speakers.  I couldn't have asked for a better one. It was a concert of small acoustic ensembles, no pick-ups, no amps; I could really take my time and listen to the system.  In general acoustic music is easier to mix because the musicians balance themselves, all I have to do is make them louder. Granted it can be a little more involved depending on the musicians.  Before mandolin madness there was another small acoustic show in the BPC that should have been easy but was mixed so loudly, it kept running into trouble.  With that in mind my objective for that evening (aside from getting accustomed to the speakers) was to make the reinforcement transparent.  I wanted it to sound like everything was coming from the stage, not from the speakers. Have nothing so loud that it might feedback, just loud enough to hear everything clearly. I decided to use all small condenser mics for the string instruments, figuring they would complement all the different instruments we had. Because all of the groups were small I had time to really listen during sound check, change and adjust mics when I needed.  But really all the fuss about the sound was for my benefit alone. A lot of times when there's not much for the engineer to do, he'll justify his presence by appearing as busy and important as possible.   I'm sure they would have been content to all play around one mic; they were just concerned with making good music.  Which was fine by me 'cause the better the music is, the more I enjoy my job.

             The concert, which was a joy to listen to, was a journey through many styles and shapes of music with the mandolin as the common theme. Throughout the night the music was varied, lively, and fun. They opened with a vivacious duet of mandolin and frame drum. The piece was a fusion jig weaving seamlessly through odd meters and intricate rhythms.   I sat back and listened as we went from the Mediterranean to Ireland and finished stateside with jazz and bluegrass.  Every ensemble while small in size, inspired movement and dancing, shouts of praise and encouragement, no one was left unmoved by the good vibes coming off the stage.  It was how a concert at a music school should be.  I'm often disheartened by the lack of enthusiasm in Berklee audiences and subsequently in the performances.  It always feels as though everyone is listening critically and not enjoying. Such was not the case here, every one involved audience and performer was there to first have fun and secondly celebrate the talent on stage. Like I said I couldn't have asked for a better concert to mix

Engineer's Perspective: My Soul Still Needs Restoring 2/12/08

I've always enjoyed black history month because even with the disorganization and general chaos one expects from the concerts, you can always expect interesting clinics and really good music.  But lately since the Africana studies department has taken over the programming the music has suffered. While I understand that it is important to know the history behind the music and the cultures that create it. I feel that academic analysis and politics have no place in the celebration of music and that ignorance in no way hinders appreciation. Having said that I wonder what has happened to our celebration of black music? It seems that it has stopped celebrating and started preaching, and that is some how not nearly as fulfilling. Last year, I remember being disappointed by Cornell West's speech that kicked off black history month. I thought it was without reflection, or insight or relevance, it was simply a lot of show with no substance.  This years BHM kick off proved to live up to those disappointing standards.  The guest this year was George Duke who has visited the college before and has always delivered inspirational and educational performances.  My disappointment does not stem from him or with his performance. My issue was with the first hour of the show where the visiting artist wasn't even present.  I watched for three days as they stumbled their way through seemingly endless rehearsing, baffled that such a talented collection of students and faculty couldn't seem to get it together.  The concert was tired; the song selection trite, and the whole thing was approached with a serious lack of enthusiasm.    That wasn't the case with George Duke's portion of the show. The band came alive in his presence and that's understandable be because he was brimming over with excitement and energy.  There was a very blatant difference between the demeanor he had during rehearsals and show and that of the leaders of the first half.  He was understanding, cheerful, accommodating and he commanded the band.  He rehearsed as little as the other ensemble, but that wasn't evident during the performance.  Listening as the first group's arrangements fall apart made me cringe.  Watching as they rehashed the same old stuff made me want to get up and walk out.  There was no soul restoration going on.  All there was was a lot of time wasted waiting for George Duke to perform.  And for what purpose, why not dedicate the whole night to the visiting artist? I'm sure everyone there would have loved to see another hour of George Duke performing.  The only saving graces to the soul restoration were two performances, one by Kudisan Kai and the other by Donna McElroy.  They were the only ones who managed to breathe some new life into the songs and give the audience something fun and sincere.  And that's really what it boiled down to, sincerity.  The whole time I couldn't shake the feeling like I was watching a spoof on what an R&B concert should be.  So even with all that talent and all that time the concert still lacked the most necessary component... soul.   

Engineer's Perspective: A New Year, A New Leaf 1/30/08

Once again the New Year begins, and we as customarily take this opportunity to reflect on our lives, the lives of others, and the world around us. We reflect and wonder what it is we can do to make all these things better. The New Year represents to us a turning of a new leaf, another chapter, a catalyst for change.  And in this spirit, (and the convenience of a long break) The Berklee Performance Center has under gone a transformation.  For those of you who don't know the BPC recently changed those beloved and uncomfortable green sets for new ones. And most exciting for me, is the installation of a new speaker system.  I won't get into any of the geeky details, suffice to say it sounds great!  With all of these new changes I feel it is only appropriate that an effort be made to change the way we (and by we I mean both engineer and performer) make an effort to make the concert experience better for all involved.

 I once talked with a musician who compared the musician engineer relationship to the Israel/ Palistine conflict. The analogy is perhaps a little extreme but the point he made is vivid. The performer/engineer relationship is plagued with a complete lack of communication, fueled by old grudges and an unwillingness to compromise.  And while I'd like to pretend that I am at all times professional and open-minded, the truth is that I am human and imperfect and probably difficult to work with at times.  But this is a new year and in the spirit of resolutions and in the constant pursuit of self-improvement, I am approaching this new school term with a clean slate for myself and for the various concert leaders I'll work with this year. 

            It is difficult in this business to receive criticism, I know this as a giver and taker of advice.  As artists we need to develop a thick skin, let stuff roll off our shoulders, take everything with a grain of salt, right?  This provides the necessary buffer to allow us to stay positive and keep going.  The drawback of course is that once this buffer is in place it is hard to take it down when it could be useful.  It's easier to keep on trucking; lay blame elsewhere.   

Engineer's Perspective: Gabriela Montero

Improvisation is often taken for granted by Berklee students.  It is just another part of the music, an inevitable part of it. We are taught and know as musicians ourselves that invention and innovation are often the product of improvisation.  It allows the musicians an opportunity to express themselves as they are at that moment. It gives them space to show their abilities.  Historically improvisation has always been an important part of music. But as of the early nineteenth century, the classical music establishment has shunned improvisation preferring to emphasize reading and the playing difficult scores instead.

Enter Gabriela Montero. Born in Venezuela, Gabriela has been playing piano since she was a toddler.  She recounted the story of how at the age of seven months her grandmother convinced her parents to give a toy piano intended for an older sibling to her.  And she has been playing piano ever since.  Performing for the first time at the age of five and her first concerto at the age of eight she has been a shining star to the classical music world for her whole life.  But aside from being a prodigy and her virtuosic abilities on the piano, Gabriela also has an extraordinary gift for improvisation, reintroducing it to the classical music world.  She described how many people who came to hear her when she first started improvising in her concerts were shocked, they didn't know what to make of her. So in an effort to bring some understanding into what she was doing she began asking members of the audience to sing her a theme on which she would base her improvised piece. And after touring the world and playing with many different orchestras Gabriela comes to Boston to perform solo, putting more emphasis improvising.     

 

The Lawrence and Alma Berk Hall is certainly a different venue from where she usually plays.  But the intimate setting made the atmosphere much more comfortable and special.  I felt as if I were sitting in her living room listening to her play after dinner.  It was like a small gathering of friends, and after a few timid requests the audience relaxed and felt free to talk and joke with the performer.  Her first improv and one of the night's best, was inspired by a snippet of a theme from The Write of Spring.  And we watched as she took a few moments to prepare herself.  Lightly doodling the theme a couple of times she closed her, took a breath, then began to play.  You can hear the influences of Chopin, Mozart and the wide breadth of styles that she has played and internalized over the years. The Write of Spring theme was an especially nice way to start the night because it was a perfect catalyst for her to make an interesting piece. It's fascinating to see where the piece begins (with just a little snippet) then makes this transformation through styles and eras of music into something completely original.  The best moment for me was when she was asked to speak about how she came to play piano. She talked about how her mother sang to her as a baby and she would in turn play those same melodies on her toy piano.  She ended the story by improvising a piece inspired by a lullaby her mother used to sing to her. The evening continued with The Simpson's theme (another favorite of mine), Somewhere Over the Rainbow, a little Elvis, and a little Beatles.  It was an amazing thing to watch, hear and be a part of and I hope she will grace us with her presence again sooner rather than later.

 If you want to hear her before her next Boston appearance check out her website.  She has started taking online request and bi-monthly she will pick one request and improvise a piece from it to post on her website. www.myspace.com/gabrielamontero

Engineer's Perspective: Maysa Clinic 9/24/07

Clinics at Berklee are often hit or miss.  I always find it interesting and at times disappointing that more often than not the clinics presented at Berklee lack much academic value.  Berklee has built it's reputation on the analysis and understanding of popular music styles.  Seeing as a lot of that music doesn't come from a very academic foundation I imagine it is difficult to find clinicians who can offer a more analytical approach to the music or the musical career.  But this is an academic institution.  Visiting artist should reflect and enhance the education being received.  I recently attended a clinic sponsored by the voice department that didn't reflect the schools level of education but was certainly an adequate representation of clinics put on at the school.  Maysa, an R&B singer popular in the early nineties, came to offer her story of the journey through music and business.  All in all she was a good speaker.  She was very nice to listen to, comfortable, eloquent, personable, and a good story teller, but was she a good clinician? I don't know.   Listening to it I'd say she is no different than any other I've heard. She first spoke of her start in the business singing back up for Stevie Wonder.  Then auditioning for Incognito, which ultimately led to her being signed as a solo artist by a record label.  And aside from some obvious bitterness from being passed over for jobs because of her weight, it was an almost fairytale like the story. Her advice was clichéd and uninspiring declaring such jewels of wisdom as "I do my job and mind my own business" as reason for her continued work, or "Do what ever you can not to sound like everybody else".    She then turned around admitting that she couldn't believe she was giving out advice because she still had so much to learn.  Humble for her to say but also very true. A clinician should be able to offer more.  How did she start? How did she get there? What got her foot in the door?  I could have answered those questions without going to the clinic, hard work, talent and the less often mentioned, luck. Any one who is in the business of making music knows that luck is essential to one's success.  So if there is no formula for success, if looks, talent, and perseverance can't guarantee security, what do you (as a clinician) have to offer me? That is the question that should be asked. What can your story offer me as an aspiring artist?  I always leave clinics disappointed for two reasons.  One is that there is never an enlightening message for me. Not even inspiration at hearing a success story because I know that success is spelled differently for everyone, or not at all for some. The clinician must ask itself "what do I have to offer?"  I believe that Maysa did ask herself that and came prepared to discuss her approach to scatting.  She touched on it briefly but was never allowed to elaborate.  The clinic was interrupted with request for her to sing something, which she was unprepared to do.  Which leads me to my second disappointment.  If the clinician is someone I admire as a musician,  I want to hear a performance.   Unfortunately the clinic leaves little room for performance.  The little I hear is never enough to satisfy.  In the case of the Maysa clinic she was never given an opportunity to offer anything.  Her discussion on scatting was interrupted which then led to a very pathetic story of her "cuss out scat" which when demonstrated was nothing more than a rhythmic scat where she made ugly faces and pointed her finger violently.  I was under-whelmed to say the least.  Now that the ball had been knocked out of her court she was completely at a loss, she awkwardly stumbled through songs she couldn't remembered, and ended the clinic with a forced sing-a-long to the song she couldn't remember.  Who's at fault?  I don't blame the clinician I blame the faculty of department heads for not giving structure and aiding the chaos.  The clinicians should be brought with education and enlightenment as the goal.  A semi successful artist alone doesn't qualify, what does the clinician have to offer? What about their story is significant.  What about their musical approach can benefit the students here? Once you find someone worthy of the audience, act as a guide to both student and clinician.  I'm tired of the same disappointments and I'm sure the students are too.            

The Engineer's Perspective 9/18/07

The Engineer’s Perspective

            Another school year has begun and the city is once again full and bustling with the animated anticipation of thousands of students returning home. Because let's face it after spending a year here, you do consider it a second home.  And while I detest the longer commute, and crowded streets, I can't help but get swept up in the excitement of all the students starting a new year. For me, part of that excitement comes from knowing that with the new school year comes new talent, and with that talent comes a new potential for a lot of great performances at the school.  Working in the Performance Center, I have the pleasure of listening to some of the best performers Berklee has to offer everyday (Well... almost everyday).  Being an engineer, there is nothing I enjoy more than mixing for a good concert.  But as a musician it always disheartens me to see how few people come out to enjoy the talent that performs here.  There is nothing sadder than a great show with no audience. And that is too often the case with recitals here at the school. Some of the best shows I've seen here were in the smallest hall with no one there except for the people working. And believe me, it doesn't make the concert more intimate when no one's there, just uncomfortable.  So After five years of being here listening, watching and enjoying, I figure that someone should take the time to shed some light on some the school's hidden treasures.  And who better to do some light shedding than that silent observer behind the board.

            While I’m sure some musician’s would argue that the sound engineer is the last person you want giving their opinions on the quality of a performance, I would beg to differ.  If anything the engineer is going to be the one person in the audience who is truly removed enough to be objective. And while I understand that in music, or in anything, true objectivity is impossible.  There is some impartiality in someone who is at the performance to work. Objectivity aside a good critic needs to listen, and no one in the audience is listening more critically than the engineer.  Often times I feel that people think we don't listen, or we don't care beyond our most minimal obligations. But engineers have an invested interest in the music, and listening is the biggest part of it. I promise we have more to offer in the form of critique than just to turn down your amp.

             Since the school year is just beginning and their aren't many concerts to tell you about, this is a perfect opportunity to hand out some friendly advice to those who are interested in putting on recitals.

 

Tip #1: Consider the performance space when deciding on the size of your band

 

I often hear the complaint that the stage is too small.  Unfortunately there isn't much we can do about that, but one thing you can do is to have a smaller band. Before you add that horn section go have a look at the hall you are performing in and think where will they go.  I'm a firm believer that comfort weighs heavily in the quality of a performance. Cramming eight people on a stage that fits 4 is not conducive to the music making experience.  Leave yourself some room to breathe. 

 

Tip#2:  Balance

 

It may be hard to believe, and it is a little hard to admit, but the engineer does not have complete control over the sound in the halls.  I know, it's shocking.  While I can guarantee that I will always do my best there are some variables that are out of my control, namely the musicians on stage.  In a live setting the job of the engineer is to simply amplify what is happening on stage, if someone is playing too loud on stage my hands are tied.  Let me demonstrate.  Say the drummer is playing too loud, since I can't make him softer I must make everything else louder.  Because he is playing loudly the other musicians can't hear themselves or each other over the drummer, now I must make it even louder on stage, which means I have to make it even louder in the audience.  This goes on until I hear that inevitable feedback rumble (or ear piercing shriek, which ever it happens to be) and am forced to turn down the monitors on stage.  The musicians are unhappy now because they can't hear themselves and they in turn don't play as well.  What a dilemma.  So how does one avoid this problem? Balance, if everyone on stage is playing at a level where they can all hear each other comfortably then there is no need for that disastrous chain of events to occur.  Think about how it sounds when you rehearse.  You probably don't use monitors when you rehearse, so here is a situation where you must balance to hear each other. Remember what that feels like when you perform. Have someone not in the group listen during rehearsal. An outside person will be more objective in their listening.  Can that person hear all the players?  Is the volume comfortable to listen to? Is any one instrument more prominent than another that shouldn't be?   Being balanced and aware of each player on stage gives the engineer more room to work, and gives you a better sounding concert.

 

Tip#3 Practice, practice, practice

 

By the time you are on stage you should be ready to perform. The sound check is not extra rehearsal time it is a sound check, which is done for the benefit of the musicians.   This is the time to make sure you are comfortable that you can hear everything well and that everything is to your liking.  If you are running through songs that you didn't get to rehearse you are not paying attention to how things sound, and I'm sure you are not calm and comfortable.  People get nervous when they perform in front of people, don't add to your nervousness by not being prepared.

 

Tip#4 Remember the sound guy is your friend

 

We are here to help you sound better.  Anything we can do (within our power) to make you more comfortable, and more at ease we will.  We are not the enemy and we do care. Trust our judgment, ask us questions, we are here for you.

I hope these tips are helpful and I look forward to hearing and seeing all your great shows this year.

Engineer's Perspective: Berklee On Broadway Goes Bust 2/27/08

If there was anything to be learned from this Sunday's concert (aside from the importance of rehearsals) is that Berklee has no business doing Broadway.  The Great American Songbook has been the one show I really look forward to during the year.  It was the best that Berklee had to offer, a real classy affair.  All tuxedos and evening gowns, a full orchestra; it is like no other show that the school puts on.  It is a night when Berklee shimmer's with the magic of good music, and Hollywood glamour. 

            For those who are interested in a bit of history, The Great American Songbook is a term given to a particular era of popular music beginning around the 1920's and tapering out in the 1960's. Interrelating the music from Broadway, Hollywood and Tin Pan Alley.  For the first few years of Berklee's American Songbook it held to this tradition with shows dedicated to the music of Gershwin, Irving Berlin, Cole Porter, and Duke Ellington.  Last year's show deviated from the others by performing the music of Stevie Wonder. And while I love Stevie Wonder's music and enjoyed the show, I felt it had lost some of it's class.  The music just didn't seem fitting with the atmosphere of the big band orchestra. Tuxedos and evening gowns were inappropriate, the orchestra seemed excessive, and the show lost some of that glamorous shimmer.  So this year's Broadway show should have been a return to what it once was right?  Unfortunately it was not.

             To be fair the show was terribly unrehearsed, some music hadn't even been handed out until that day.  On top of that, the band had all been there since one o'clock in the afternoon with just one break for dinner before the show. So by the time the show started the band had been there for seven hours rehearsing.  But aside from that I also thought the song selection was lacking in cohesion, the arrangements were corny, the transitions were sloppy and badly thought out, and the vocal performances were mediocre. Some of the composers weren't even American (but that's just being knit-picky). The concert wasn't bad, but it was hardly something to write home about.  I walked away saying "well... they got through it." and wondering what happened to this show.  I can't understand why they didn't choose just one composer. It would have added some cohesion to the songs, they wouldn't have needed so many different vocalist, and they wouldn't have needed such a big band. (Not that they ever needed such a big band to begin with.)  What they did need was a little organization; they needed to realize that Berklee has no business attempting Broadway.  Berklee does jazz and does it extremely well, I'm not saying they shouldn't have used Broadway songs, but arrange them in the jazz style. Have a little fun with it. The concert was so all over the place I wasn't really sure what to think. The end result was that I thought the jazz numbers were excellent and that everything else was weak in comparison.

 

            The one saving grace in the night was Donna Mc Elroy.  Originally she was the only vocalist in the show. Songbook was her show, she is who people came to see; she made it special. This year she was the crutch that kept the show from being a complete disaster.  I cringed listening to the singer add R&B runs to "Music of the Night"; I sat nervously hoping no one's voice cracked or they didn't run out of breath or forget the words.  At least Donna owned the un-preparedness, attempted to excuse it, but that did little to appease the awkwardness surrounding the evening. It felt as if the entire ensemble was holding it's breath waiting for the whole thing to fall apart. Resulting in a show that just couldn't let lose and get into the music.  I still have faith in songbook though, and hope that next years will be all of the things that made me love this show in the first place.